Bruce Lipton is a biologist who now teaches new age ideas about spirituality and medicine. There is a lot of bunk surrounding this guy, here is one of his lectures.

​
He also has written two books, The Biology of Belief and Spontaneous Evolution. Both say generally the same thing and have a lot of pseudoscience but here I want to focus on his claim that you can heal incurable diseases with your beliefs and mind. He argues that DNA is more plastic than we are lead to believe, claiming that mutations are not random and that we do have control over our genomes. He also points to epigenetics, the study of how proteins regulate gene expression, as evidence to his claim.

His first claim of mutations not being random has no evidence whatsoever to support it. In his Spontaneous Evolution book, he points to a paper published in Nature in 1988 written by John Cairns. The paper describes an experiment where E. coli with a defective mutant gene for breaking down lactose are placed in a medium containing nothing but lactose. Results were that the bacteria had mutated and were able to break down the lactose and grow. Cairns concluded that the mutation was not random and Lipton claims that we can do similar things when our health is compromised. This idea has huge problems because not only was the experiment flawed but there are perfectly good explanations. All of it is discussed rather thoroughly on Wiki.

Lipton's second claim is where the bulk of his ideas come from. He asserts that since proteins control gene expression that we somehow have power over that mechanism with our consciousness and proceeds to tell stories of miracle cures via hypnosis and meditation that can most likely be explained by cases of misdiagnosis or a very lucky recovery. The problem here is that proteins are made with instruction from DNA and specific proteins regulate the expression of certain genes. No gene, no regulatory protein, so genes indirectly control their own expression. As discussed in the previous point, changes in DNA are random, so we cannot control which gene is going to change to produce which protein unless we use genetic engineering. The misconception comes with epigenetics. The most dramatic epigenetic changes are permanent and happen early in development. Epigenetic changes in mature individuals are usually superficial, such as eye color changes, hormone levels, sleep cycle, and other processes that are already very self-regulated. More can be read on that topic here and here. Lipton claims that these processes can somehow be controlled with our beliefs and be used to unlock DNA that can help us live healthy and peacefully without the help from government or pharmaceutical companies. A classic snake-oil salesman who sells false hope to sick patients.

Haven't checked that out yet for specifics, he certainly might be hyping the science and extending it farther than is warranted. Long term meditation does lead to anatomical changes in the brain that can be measured by various scanning technologies (MRI, fMRI, etc). Meditation reduces cortisol and increases melatonin, and this changes the pattern of gene expression. Here's a study from the top of the stack that shows that the genes responsible for producing some very inflammatory molecules can be reduced by meditation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22795617

Here is one of my favorite studies related to this topic - "Quantum squeezed state analysis of spontaneous ultra weak light photon emission of practitioners of meditation and control subjects" People who meditate throw off fewer photons!! I believe that this effect is very real, but the interpretation of the study requires additional research and thought - it would be wrong to jump to many of the quasi-religious conclusions as some have done. But meditation (and exercise and diet) can change you, even on the quantum level!! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18697618

I have to emphasize that what I'm debunking here are his claims about genes, evolution, and medicine. It is true that meditation (prayer, contemplation, etc.) can be a very good thing for someone's well-being. Any good doctor would encourage you to make good changes in things like diet and exercise. Your lifestyle can be changed for the better, which can help change gene expression, but none of those things can change the genes themselves. That is where Lipton presents pseudoscience. Meditation is not a cure-all for health complications and mental diseases. Those kinds of methods are good supplements but should by no means be substituted for real medicine. Lipton seems to have no problem suggesting just that in his books. Meditation is definitely a good thing, but it is an easy target for pseudoscientists to attach hype to.

Yes it does. Misdiagnosis is something that you know happens. And a percentage of cancer cases experience spontaneous remission. We don't know why exactly, but that's not reason to start believing it's because people rewire their DNA with their brains.

I do FEEL that a positive attitude is useful in many diseases. I doubt it 'rewires' the DNA. My thought is that it reduces the stress hormones and thus your own immune system is able to fight the disease off.

It is true that even many cancers, never develop to become life threatening. We can look at the problems we are having with the tests for prostrate cancer.

Yes your attitude is very important for that reason. Certain experiences trigger certain chemicals to be produced int he body. Lipton has a point in saying that we can change our perception on certain things to help us keep a positive outlook and if he just stuck with that and didn't throw in all of this nonsense about DNA, curing serious illness, and how evolution happens I think he would be a lot more respected.

Well, yes. There are many factors that go into a disease. These biological systems are very complex. For example, developing cancer is a game of chance where the odds are decided by genes and how damage your DNA takes due to choices in your lifestyle. Despite being careful, however, people can still develop cancer due to random mutation. Luck in recovering has elements of chance too. Some people's immune systems are better suited to destroy cancer cells and things we don't fully understand happen to create that very rare "miracle" recovery. A kind of recovery we can't promise will happen to everyone. The example of cancer here is very complex and a lot of work is being done to understand it.

Progression to cancer can occur more rapidly if an individual inherits a germ-line mutation in a cancer-associated gene; this person's cells will be one step closer to cancer from the very beginning. According to the Cancer Gene Census (Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute 2008), among the currently known cancer genes, 70 are associated with germ-line mutations, and 342 are associated with somatic mutations. Furthermore, 281 cancer-associated chromosomal translocations have also been identified.

Click to expand...

Today, scientists are armed with an entirely new arsenal of weapons in their fight against cancer: the human genome has been sequenced in its entirety, a large collection of genes have been identified in which mutations contribute to cancer, and an ever-expanding array of technologies is being used to identify new cancer-associated genes. Genetic testing can be employed to determine inherited cancer risk, or to obtain a genetic "fingerprint" of a tumor. In the future, an increasing number of cancer therapies will be genetically tailored to specifically and effectively target cancer cells. However, in order to understand the basis of these treatments, it is first necessary to understand the general genetic mechanisms by which cancer arises.

In dogs, the demodex mange mite is found on most dogs (and most people also with have it in as well). The dog's immune system (and ours keeps these mites in check). However, when the immune system is weakened, the mange can cause skin problems.

To some extent the same is true of the mite that causes sarcoptic mange in dogs and scabies in humans.

Firstly I think referencing a wiki page that has a huge notice above saying it has issues and is missing citations is not a good start to debunking any theory. Your argument is interesting and has merit.

But I have to agree that there have been too many "miss diagnosed" and "very lucky recovery's" to allow your argument to go unchallenged. Yes, perhaps we are not able to change our DNA with our minds. But there is something there. People everywhere appear to be healing themselves of a number of illnesses and life threatening diseases.

By all means debunk, but come up with a better argument than a persons luck being at the crux of your argument.

Bruce Lipton is a biologist who now teaches new age ideas about spirituality and medicine. There is a lot of bunk surrounding this guy, here is one of his lectures... Both say generally the same thing and have a lot of pseudoscience but here I want to focus on his claim that you can heal incurable diseases with your beliefs and mind. He argues that DNA is more plastic than we are lead to believe, claiming that mutations are not random and that we do have control over our genomes. He also points to epigenetics, the study of how proteins regulate gene expression, as evidence to his claim... Lipton claims that these processes can somehow be controlled with our beliefs and be used to unlock DNA that can help us live healthy and peacefully without the help from government or pharmaceutical companies. A classic snake-oil salesman who sells false hope to sick patients.

Click to expand...

Considering the wealth of scientific literature referenced in Mr. Lipton’s books which serve to support millennia of eastern medical tradition and teachings, as well as the lack of informational support you yourself give for all of your ‘debunking’, I’m surprised anyone takes you seriously. Bruce Lipton does a very good job of explaining quantum energy theory to Western minds and, though it may be new to you and to countless ‘accredited’ Western associations and thinkers, deserves a large amount of respect for writing such a comprehensive book without bashing his opponents – a respect that is rarely granted back to him.

This is information which has been taught throughout the ages, whether by ancient yogis, Shaolin or Zen masters, or other cultural masters and healers, all who have the innate ability to understand disease and wellness in ways our licensed doctors never could. And you stand here and refute it with ignorant ramblings? It was once pointed out to me that the Western allopathic medical system is the only healing system in the world which refuses to accept the vital life energy which is inherent in all living beings and environments. Think about that for a moment.

Did you even read the book? Or perhaps you skimmed through it, reading the summaries and other people’s interpretations before sounding off on the board here. Anyone who truly read the book and sought to understand the information presented within the pages could not, while keeping a straight face, bash Bruce Lipton and his research or try to undermine his theories.

A balanced opinion will show much more truth than a biased one. Perhaps you should try to take aim at the foundations on which your own beliefs are currently built with the same unrelenting aggression you fire at Mr. Lipton’s theories. If your current beliefs hold up under such fire, like the truth of Mr. Lipton’s science does regardless of the bashing and debunking that is thrown his way, then I think you’re in the clear to continue speaking your mind as you do. If it doesn’t, maybe you need to re-examine your own beliefs, and not Mr. Lipton’s.

I have to emphasize that what I'm debunking here are his claims about genes, evolution, and medicine. It is true that meditation (prayer, contemplation, etc.) can be a very good thing for someone's well-being. Any good doctor would encourage you to make good changes in things like diet and exercise. Your lifestyle can be changed for the better, which can help change gene expression, but none of those things can change the genes themselves. That is where Lipton presents pseudoscience. Meditation is not a cure-all for health complications and mental diseases. Those kinds of methods are good supplements but should by no means be substituted for real medicine. Lipton seems to have no problem suggesting just that in his books. Meditation is definitely a good thing, but it is an easy target for pseudoscientists to attach hype to.

Click to expand...

I think people might be confusing the gist of what Lipton is saying. In the 1 1/2 hour lecture I just listened to, he never claimed that we could change our DNA, but rather that the amino acid chains that make up the backbone of proteins receive signals from the quantum field. He goes on to explain that by changing the quantum field we can actually affect how the proteins bind and interrelate to other proteins affecting the systems in the body.
The field effects of quantum physics and in particular the widely accepted notion of entanglement should make one pause and reconsider the materialist, Newtonian view of our Universe. Specifically in regards to health, well-being, and medicine, the Western approach of better living through chemistry has been shown to be lacking in many instances. We now know that the Universe is not made up of matter as we once thought. Indeed, it is made up of energy that expresses itself in the form of fields and vibrations. This is not “woo woo” science. This is cutting edge, quantum mechanics. If this is so, why do medical schools in the Western world that teach “real medicine” as you say, still teach the Newtonian, materialist view that organic chemistry is the best platform to explain the body’s functions even though, according to the latest research, quantum field theory explains the movement of molecules or mechanical turnstiles in a way that Newtonian, organic chemistry has been unable to do? (see reference below)"The scientific journal Nature published a paper by Pophristic and Goodman where they show how they could not predict the movement of a molecule using Newtonian physics. They had to look at the movement in regard to quantum physics before they were able to predict its movement.A review by physical chemist Frank Weinhold, published along with this paper, said “The most pressing question raised by Pophristic and Goodman is: when will chemistry textbooks begin to serve as aids, rather than barriers, to this enriched quantum-mechanical perspective on how mechanical turnstiles work.”
That’s not to say that Western medicine in general and pharmaceuticals in particular haven’t contributed to the over-all health and well-being of our society in specific instances. But even discoveries once considered as some of mankind’s greatest achievements in regards to medicine are now being questioned. Take the proliferation of super-bugs in response to an over-proliferation of prescription anti-biotics or studies that seem to indicate that certain vaccines may do more harm than good. Lipton’s beef, as I see it, is not with the whole of Western medicine, but more specifically the dogma of genetic materialism and that chemicals, vis a vis drugs, are our best defense and treatment for illness. I don’t think he has any problems with let’s say, a trauma surgeon re-attaching a severed finger.
If we are to learn anything from the study of science from an historical perspective, we should take note that although current scientific paradigm might seem to be doing us much good, it doesn’t mean that the paradigm is the absolute, best way to view the way in which systems in the Universe work. I’m sure you don’t need to be reminded of the plight of Galileo or the fact that a short time before Einstein’s paper on relativistic theory was published, the leading physicists of the day were exclaiming that we had “discovered everything there is to know” about physics and that the only new knowledge was likely to come from more precise measurements.
The din of Randiesque debunkers is slowly being drowned out by the latest discoveries in quantum mechanics that show conclusively, in my non-scientific opinion, that the influence of fields and quantum non-locality is by far the most promising avenue for future discoveries, not only in medicine, but every other area of science. I do not think it will be long before many areas once considered to be completely woo woo dogma, will be shown, through hypothesis, rigorous experimentation, and a high incidence of repeatable results, to be much more worthy of our attention than the outdated, materialist viewpoint.

I think people might be confusing the gist of what Lipton is saying. In the 1 1/2 hour lecture I just listened to, he never claimed that we could change our DNA, but rather that the amino acid chains that make up the backbone of proteins receive signals from the quantum field. He goes on to explain that by changing the quantum field we can actually affect how the proteins bind and interrelate to other proteins affecting the systems in the body.

Click to expand...

He also claims that fire-walking is "mind-over-matter", when all it is is thermodynamics. It make it hard to take him seriously.

I'm sure there's a vast amount of knowledge left to discover. However all Lipton is doing is speculating.

It is mind overmatter. is the mind now involved in thermodynamics? Yes it is. Just because a person seems to be able to overcome what we call standard occurrences doesn't mean there isn't a physics behind it. If a person could do something that seemed extra-ordinary to the uneducated person then it most certainly also has properties and dynamics in the physical/biological sciences. Just because science does not fully understand entirely how it works does not mean that it does not exist and that a future discovery is not in the midst.

It is mind overmatter. is the mind now involved in thermodynamics? Yes it is. Just because a person seems to be able to overcome what we call standard occurrences doesn't mean there isn't a physics behind it. If a person could do something that seemed extra-ordinary to the uneducated person then it most certainly also has properties and dynamics in the physical/biological sciences. Just because science does not fully understand entirely how it works does not mean that it does not exist and that a future discovery is not in the midst.

Click to expand...

Science does understand fire walking though. And the mind has nothing to do with it, other than overcoming fear, and telling the body to keep moving.

Yep - did it myself a couple of decades ago - was fine except I put my heel into soft ground at the very end of the embers and a hot ash fell off the "bed" and lodged against my achilles tendon for a second causing a blister.

I had helped construct the bed of embers - it was made up of standard local firewood - pinus radiata - built up into a pyre then raked over a prepared clay bed when it had stopped burning.

no drugs, meditation or medicine of any kind were required for my soles to be uninjured by walking about 6 feet, nor anything except a plaster and about a week for the burn on my heel to heal.

Considering the wealth of scientific literature referenced in Mr. Lipton’s books which serve to support millennia of eastern medical tradition and teachings, as well as the lack of informational support you yourself give for all of your ‘debunking’, I’m surprised anyone takes you seriously. Bruce Lipton does a very good job of explaining quantum energy theory to Western minds and, though it may be new to you and to countless ‘accredited’ Western associations and thinkers, deserves a large amount of respect for writing such a comprehensive book without bashing his opponents – a respect that is rarely granted back to him.

Click to expand...

I've fully read his book, Spontaneous Evolution. It references other new age books and its total amount of citations is relatively small compared to other books by scientific authors. Eastern medicine and Western medicine isn't all that different. Have you ever heard of ethnobotany? HowStuffWorks did an excellent article and podcast on it. It is a profession where, generally, anthropologists or botanists will go visit remote areas to talk to shamans and traditional healers. They do have a wealth of knowledge about plants in the area, and the ethnobotanist is supposed to gather that information, samples of plants, and bring those samples back to a lab so that synthetic chemists can identify, isolate, and synthesize the active medical molecules in those plants. Some may say that synthetic is different but it really isn't, the synthetic molecule is structured and behaves the same way as the natural one. If we all used the natural version, then the medicines would not be able to be produced on a mass scale and a huge amount of the population would be SOL. That is the main difference of Eastern and Western medicine is mostly the method of delivery, both work. The only reason Eastern medicine is viewed so differently is because it is easier to make a con business out of it and make it seem very appealing to the public. Lipton does just this. He stretches pseudoscientific ideas like evolution and epigenetics to support his ideas which he has no evidence for. His citations aren't very good, especially for the big claims he makes of miraculous healing. There is just no reproduction of those results or published papers providing evidence for it. You haven't really given a reason to as to why I might be wrong about everything I've said here.

Another problem that seems to be always overlooked with the folks that want 'natural medicines' only, is the impact that growing/gathering them would have on the environment. We can look at the problems with American Ginseng already. Can you imagine stripping willow trees of bark instead of lab grown aspirin?

I think my best friend has finally trained the folks that do yard work for her, to NOT spray the dandelions with weed killer. She wants them. She is a good herbalist and she even has a 'still room' with things drying in it.

I think people might be confusing the gist of what Lipton is saying. In the 1 1/2 hour lecture I just listened to, he never claimed that we could change our DNA, but rather that the amino acid chains that make up the backbone of proteins receive signals from the quantum field. He goes on to explain that by changing the quantum field we can actually affect how the proteins bind and interrelate to other proteins affecting the systems in the body.

Click to expand...

He actually does claim in his books that we can change our DNA. There is a lot of research that has been done on what influences proteins and their shape. Saying that quantum fields can change them and that we change quantum fields is a bold claim that I don't think any evidence exists for. Newtonian phsyics has little to nothing to do with the way organic molecules interact and react with each other.I'm not surprised they could predict its movement with quantum physics because quantum phsyics describes the phsyics of very small things, as opposed to Newtonian phsycis which apply much better to the macroscopic world. To my knowledge, quantum physics has already benefited medicine by employing methods of lasers, nanoparticles, and much better computing. Not in any way of influencing fields. Quantum physics is not my area of expertise though, and if you think there is evidence that the quantum field is influencing our health in a way we can influence ourselves then please post it.

If we are to learn anything from the study of science from an historical perspective, we should take note that although current scientific paradigm might seem to be doing us much good, it doesn’t mean that the paradigm is the absolute, best way to view the way in which systems in the Universe work.

Click to expand...

Of course its no perfect, but you need a lot of evidence if you want to change it. Not every new radical idea that challenges current understanding is a good one. Most are actually really bad.

But even discoveries once considered as some of mankind’s greatest achievements in regards to medicine are now being questioned. Take the proliferation of super-bugs in response to an over-proliferation of prescription anti-biotics or studies that seem to indicate that certain vaccines may do more harm than good.

Click to expand...

Super bugs are not associated with vaccines. You might be thinking of vaccines being less effective or not consistently effective due to a certain virus species having a very rapid mutation rate. Super bugs refer to bacteria and a resistant strain forming doesn't mean it will be the strain to replace the entire population. That doesn't really happen. But one thing to remember in that kind of discussion is the evolutionary concept of the Red Queen. As those bacteria are evolving and changing, so are we as a population, and so is our medicine. Medicine has its ways of keeping up with those resistant strains. For example, penicillin resistant strains of certain bacteria have been identified which made it useless for a time. No that strain is no longer passing around that resistance and so penicillin can now be used on those species again. What other discoveries are we talking about?

Another problem that seems to be always overlooked with the folks that want 'natural medicines' only, is the impact that growing/gathering them would have on the environment. We can look at the problems with American Ginseng already. Can you imagine stripping willow trees of bark instead of lab grown aspirin?

I think my best friend has finally trained the folks that do yard work for her, to NOT spray the dandelions with weed killer. She wants them. She is a good herbalist and she even has a 'still room' with things drying in it.

Click to expand...

Other health crazes can create major problems, also. The demand for quinoa is beginning to have drastic effect on traditional farming techniques in Peru and has the potential to cause serious economic and environmental damage.

One of my favorites are the folks that seem to think that farming hemp is the cure for everything. Hemp oil can replace gasoline, hemp fiber can be used instead of plastics and for pater, hemp seed is a great nutrition source. One of their 'selling points' is that 'hemp will grow everywhere', and you can get multiple crops every year.

I researched it, according to the Canadian hemp growers Assoc. Commercial hemp requires good soil (equal to that needed for wheat or corn), fertilizer, and irrigation or good rainfall. Only a very few areas of the US would have a long enough growing season for more than one harvest. Opps,

One of my favorites are the folks that seem to think that farming hemp is the cure for everything. Hemp oil can replace gasoline, hemp fiber can be used instead of plastics and for pater, hemp seed is a great nutrition source. One of their 'selling points' is that 'hemp will grow everywhere', and you can get multiple crops every year.

I researched it, according to the Canadian hemp growers Assoc. Commercial hemp requires good soil (equal to that needed for wheat or corn), fertilizer, and irrigation or good rainfall. Only a very few areas of the US would have a long enough growing season for more than one harvest. Opps,

Click to expand...

lol how much research did you do brooo? farming hemp won't 'cure' everything but it would certainly help. hemp is the only agriculture crop that grows all over the world (ie. not just areas of USA and Canada but Africa, Europe, China, Australia, India, etc. etc.), it can grow in low fertile and high salinity soils (obviously for optimum yields and depending what your growing it for good soil and some fertilizer may be required, but nothing like corn or cotton), doesn't need pesticides or herbicides, adapts to the area that its growing in, and is such a versatile plant with so many uses. Hemp has got to be the most useful and usable crop on our planet and it's cause of people like you that this insanity still continues...

First I am not a brooo. Second I have done quite a bit. I became interested after reading "Ain't Nobody's Business' by Peter McWilliams. I didn't just look at pro hemp sites, I looked it like I had land and wanted to know if hemp would be a good crop to grow.

Here is some of what I found. You might notice that none of them are anti hemp sites

Industrial hemp can be grown on a wide variety of soil types. Hemp prefers a sufficiently deep, well-aerated soil with a pH pf 6 or greater, along with good moisture and nutrient holding capacity. Poorly drained soils, however, are not recommended as excess water after heavy rains can result in damage to the hemp crop. Hemp is extremely sensitive to flooding and soil compaction
Soil Preparation

A fine, firm seedbed is required for fast, uniform germination of hemp seed. Conventional seedbed preparation and drilling are probably ideal. The seedlings will not emerge uniformly if the seed is placed to a depth greater than 2 inches. "No-till systems" can also be used with good results, but may be more vulnerable to erratic emergence depending on the growing season.
3. Nutrition

To achieve an optimum hempyield, twice as much nutrient must be available to the crop as will finally be removed from the soil at harvest. A hemp field produces a very large bulk of vegetative material in a short vegetative period. The nitrogen uptake is most intensive the first 6 to 8 weeks, while potassium and in particular phosphorous are needed more during flowering and seed formation. Industrial hemp requires 105 to 130 lbs./acre (120 to 150 kg./ha) nitrogen, 45 to 70 lbs./acre (50 to 80 kg/ha) phosphate and 52 to 70 lbs./acre (60 to 80 kg/ha) potash.

. Growing Conditions

Hemp prefers a mild climate, humid atmosphere, and a rainfall of at least 25-30 inches per year. Good soil moisture is required for seed germination and until the young plants are well established.
5. Weed Control

Industrial hemp is an extremely efficient weed suppressor. No chemicals are needed for growing this crop. Industrial hemp is a low maintenance crop. There are no registered chemicals for weed control in hemp. A normal stand of 200 to 300 plants per square meter shades out the weeds, leaving the fields weed-free at harvest for the next crop.

Notice the canopy effect created by the dense planting. When properly planted and cultivated, weed control is a non issue.

Although hemp is well adapted to the temperate climatic zone and will grow under varied environmental conditions, it grows best with warm growing conditions, an extended frost-free season, highly productive agricultural soils, and abundant moisture throughout the growing season. When grown under proper conditions, hemp is very competitive with weeds, and herbicides are generally not required in hemp production. Although a number of insect pests and diseases have been reported on hemp, significant crop losses from pests are not common. High levels of soil fertility are required to maximize hemp productivity. Cultural requirements and production costs are quite similar to those of corn. Reported hemp yields range from 2.5 to 8.7 tons of dry stems per acre.

The climatic and soil requirements of hemp can be met in some agricultural areas of the PNW, however, hemp will almost certainly require irrigation to reliably maximize productivity in the region. The requirement for supplemental irrigation will place hemp in direct competition with the highest value crops in the PNW, limiting available acreage. Stem yields will have to be substantially higher than those previously recorded for hemp to be economically feasible in the PNW at current prices. It is unlikely that the investment needed to improve hemp production technology will be made until legislative restrictions are removed from the crop.

Hemp does well in a variety of soil types, but does not tolerate drought, flooding, saturated or saline soils. It is
tolerant of light spring frosts. Tests show that hemp grows well in the Dark Brown to the thick Black soils of
Saskatchewan with medium texture, high soil moisture and a long growing season. This is particularly true for
Finola, a northern variety with a Russian/Finish origin. Hemp is not well-suited for the southwest due to the
drier conditions and heavy clay soils. In general, hemp is best suited to areas with moderate rainfall and good
soil fertility.
Maturity varies from 80 to 120 days depending on variety and date of seeding. Hemp is a photosensitive plant,
thus flowering of the plant is triggered by the shorter day lengths after June 21. Crops seeded in early spring
may produce taller stalks and higher yields, but will not flower or mature much earlier than later seeded crops.
Hemp should be seeded between May 1 and May 31, with May 15 being the optimum seeding date. Since
hemp is sensitive to day-length,
late-seeded crops will not have sufficient biomass to produce a good yield, as the plant will flower after June 21,
regardless of the size of the plant

Soil Conditions:
iHemp responds to a well drained, loam soil with pH (acidity) above 6.0. Neutral to slightly alkaline (pH7.0 - 7.5) is preferred. The higher the clay content of the soil the lower the yield of grain or fibre. Clay soils are easily compacted and iHemp is very sensitive to soil compaction. Young plants are very sensitive to wet soils or flooding during the first 3 weeks or until growth reaches the fourth internode (approx. 30 cm or 12” tall). Water damaged plants will remain stunted, resulting in a weedy, uneven and poor crop.

Poorly structured, drought-prone sandy soils provide very little natural fertility or support for the iHemp plant. Extra nutrients and water will be required to achieve maximum yields on these soils, hence the extra costs make production uneconomical.

Well, this paper is actually talking about epigenetic changes. An epigenetic change is not a change in the DNA sequence, it has to do with chemical modifications to regulation mechanisms. The epigenetic changes it discusses are also a result of injury, not any kind of mind over matter. They also talk about how an enriched environment can help reverse the methylation in damaged nerve cells thus reducing hypersensitivity to their tests. Lastly, they mention the limitations of their tests.

Thus, the directionality and consequences of changes in global DNA methylation in chronic pain may be region-specific (spinal vs. supraspinal), species-specific (rat vs. mouse), may vary by type of injury or may vary as a function of chronicity (2 weeks vs. 6 months). Each of these possible explanations has potential clinical implications, additional studies are needed to further explore this discrepancy.

Click to expand...

Although our data shows that environmental enrichment returned nerve injury-related changes in global DNA methylation to control levels, it is possible that a certain populations of individual gene promoters maintained their differentially methylated state. Future studies incorporating comprehensive, high throughput analysis of changes in DNA methylation and their effect on the expression of individual genes in chronic pain conditions are needed. Such studies are currently underway in our laboratory.
Our study does not distinguish between the effects of nerve injury from those of ongoing chronic pain and its comorbidities. It is possible that the observed supraspinal changes are due to other effects of the nerve injury itself such as motor impairment instead of being a consequence of living with chronic pain. Finally, the current study does not examine the time-course of global methylation changes, instead focusing on the long-term effects of peripheral neuropathy on the brain. Further studies are needed to determine how long after nerve injury changes in global DNA methylation develop and if they contribute to or are the result of pain chronification.

Click to expand...

Their experiments are very interesting, but can you explain why you think this paper is relevant to the discussion here?

Dan i'm curious if you watched the entire video which you posted? I'm not schooled in any scientific area and would like to know if you think i'm wrong for perceiving what he has to say has some merit? I like his energy or passion for what he speaks about and it makes a little sense to me but i'm confused why you are so against his theory. I'm not sure he was trying to sell anything but an idea and i want to know why you would debunk someone just for having a different school of thought than yourself. You might see it as a silly question but i hope you reply because i just find it fascinating and will continue to read more about it. Thanks for the thread Dan

Just want to perceive a loving environment here so I will not have high blood pressure and that way I stay healthier longer. Kudos for Lipton!!! the ones that opposes are like the people thinking the world was not round, or that the Sun goes around the Earth and things like that, just give them the time...and they will know. Love!Love!Love! love to everyone and everything, LOVE YOU GUYS!!!

Biology was something I had to miss out at school. It gave me leave to construct my own version, which was that living beings had sort of feedback system back to their core DNA structure, allowing their experience to alter their design, bit by bit.

It took a more proper understanding of evolution to convince me that that feedback wasn't necessary at the normal pace that evolution sets for living beings, and a switchable set of functional options was probably always possible within DNA design. Occam.

Dan i'm curious if you watched the entire video which you posted? I'm not schooled in any scientific area and would like to know if you think i'm wrong for perceiving what he has to say has some merit? I like his energy or passion for what he speaks about and it makes a little sense to me but i'm confused why you are so against his theory. I'm not sure he was trying to sell anything but an idea and i want to know why you would debunk someone just for having a different school of thought than yourself. You might see it as a silly question but i hope you reply because i just find it fascinating and will continue to read more about it. Thanks for the thread Dan

Click to expand...

It's not a silly question. Yes, I have watched a couple of his lectures and have read his book, Spontaneous Evolution. You're right, he is not selling a specific product but he is selling an idea. Not every idea is good. I criticize his ideas because they encourage mistrust, misunderstanding, and misuse of science. Mistrust because he paints a picture of a close-minded scientific community. Misunderstanding because he twists facts. Misuse because his ideas encourage medical treatments, products, and science that is not actually scientific. What it all adds up to are people who forego modern medical treatments and supported scientific theories for ideas that don't actually have any experimental or scientific background.

Just want to perceive a loving environment here so I will not have high blood pressure and that way I stay healthier longer. Kudos for Lipton!!! the ones that opposes are like the people thinking the world was not round, or that the Sun goes around the Earth and things like that, just give them the time...and they will know. Love!Love!Love! love to everyone and everything, LOVE YOU GUYS!!!

Click to expand...

That's good, it's great to perceive the world as a loving environment. It's very important for your overall health. But when a time comes where you or someone you know actually gets very ill, please don't go to people like Lipton.

It took a more proper understanding of evolution to convince me that that feedback wasn't necessary at the normal pace that evolution sets for living beings, and a switchable set of functional options was probably always possible within DNA design. Occam.

Click to expand...

It is amazing how it all works. Understanding how epigenetics works and how the environment influences it is one of the most interesting topics in molecular biology right now. I remember this documentary being very interesting if anyone has time to watch it.

​

If I remember right, they have a segment about "junk DNA" and how mysterious it is, but those non-coding sequences of DNA are now understood to be extremely important in regulating gene expression. Other than that, I think it was a very helpful and informative documentary.

In relevance to this thread, these genetic/epigenetic switches aren't always super sensitive to the environment and our thoughts. They mostly work based on concentrations of certain proteins and substrates that create biofeedback loops that are self-regulated by the DNA.

What is very clear from everyone's comments on this blog, is that to some extent mind does influence matter & our health. The question therefore is: How much? and is there somehow an undiscovered or undeveloped potential here? Awareness exercises will show you that you & everyone else live in a very small fraction of what goes on in your head. So if we could quiet all the monkey-mind, the rather insane thoughts & disorganized energies which lie below our convincingly hypnotic, though inaccurate sense of self; if we could bring all that energy of our consciousness fully into the moment, isn't it possible, or doesn't it even seem likely, that this new Mind, so foreign to us in the West, could have a much greater effect on our bodies & perhaps even our surroundings? The place to explore these issues is in our own minds, not out in the external world. Consciousness is like a light, a flashlight in the dark. The more of it you bring into the present moment, the more you can see. But like the Buddha said: don't take my word for it, find out for yourself, if you care to.

What is very clear from everyone's comments on this blog, is that to some extent mind does influence matter & our health. The question therefore is: How much? and is there somehow an undiscovered or undeveloped potential here? Awareness exercises will show you that you & everyone else live in a very small fraction of what goes on in your head. So if we could quiet all the monkey-mind, the rather insane thoughts & disorganized energies which lie below our convincingly hypnotic, though inaccurate sense of self; if we could bring all that energy of our consciousness fully into the moment, isn't it possible, or doesn't it even seem likely, that this new Mind, so foreign to us in the West, could have a much greater effect on our bodies & perhaps even our surroundings? The place to explore these issues is in our own minds, not out in the external world. Consciousness is like a light, a flashlight in the dark. The more of it you bring into the present moment, the more you can see. But like the Buddha said: don't take my word for it, find out for yourself, if you care to.

Click to expand...

I'd prefer to have it demonstrated scientifically, which would save everyone a lot of repeated effort.

What is very clear from everyone's comments on this blog, is that to some extent mind does influence matter & our health. The question therefore is: How much? and is there somehow an undiscovered or undeveloped potential here? Awareness exercises will show you that you & everyone else live in a very small fraction of what goes on in your head. So if we could quiet all the monkey-mind, the rather insane thoughts & disorganized energies which lie below our convincingly hypnotic, though inaccurate sense of self; if we could bring all that energy of our consciousness fully into the moment, isn't it possible, or doesn't it even seem likely, that this new Mind, so foreign to us in the West, could have a much greater effect on our bodies & perhaps even our surroundings? The place to explore these issues is in our own minds, not out in the external world. Consciousness is like a light, a flashlight in the dark. The more of it you bring into the present moment, the more you can see. But like the Buddha said: don't take my word for it, find out for yourself, if you care to.

Click to expand...

This is one of those new modern myths that allow people to believe that they are greater than they actually are.

The concept that we only use a small part of our brains and have a vast untapped potential, allows the belief that if we could just utilize that other 90 or 97%, we would have super powers, or telepathy, telekinesis, etc. This makes us feel special in the same way that believing that the universe was created just for us, does.